Latest RAJARs

[Serial_Apologist]

I know this is ploddingly, mind-numbingly boring,

NOooooooooo!!!!!

You always do a wonderful job, ff.

[french frank]

NOooooooooo!!!!!

You always do a wonderful job, ff.

Ooooh, Serial

[DracoM]

NOooooooooo!!!!!

You always do a wonderful job, ff.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I wonder if the R3 rajar figures are now getting so small as to be statistically fairly meaningless. There seems to be a particularly marked fall in share in TSA* -from 1.4% to 1.1% from Q4 2016 to Q4 2017 - a twenty percent loss in share. Also perhaps significant the hours per listener down - I would have thought that might indicate some dissatisfaction with what's on offer.

* from the RAJAR glossary -
"Share in TSA - The percentage of total listening time accounted for by a station in its Total Survey Area in an average week. This is obtained by dividing the station’s total hours by the All Radio total hours in the station’s TSA."

[french frank]

I wonder if the R3 rajar figures are now getting so small as to be statistically fairly meaningless. There seems to be a particularly marked fall in share in TSA* -from 1.4% to 1.1% from Q4 2016 to Q4 2017 - a twenty percent loss in share. Also perhaps significant the hours per listener down - I would have thought that might indicate some dissatisfaction with what's on offer.

Difficult. Share is skewed precisely because it depends more on how much people are listening to other stations. If listening is generally high one quarter, Radio 3's is bound to be a much lower proportion, even if, on its own terms, it's done very well. If general listening drops down low, Radio 3 stands a chance of registering a slightly higher %age share. Not sure if that's clear?

Hours per head tend to vary depending on R3's reach. Total hours clocked up depend on the quarter's reach: you don't expect 1.9m listeners to clock up the same number of hours as 2.2m. Hours per head are slightly more indicative. But there may be fewer listeners who listen, on average, for longer; whereas a larger number of listeners may listen, on average, for fewer hours - because they will tend to include the more casual ones, rather than the hard core of devotees.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Total listener hours for q4 17 was a mere 0. 95 % less than q4 16 ( 10,000 hours less than Q4' 16 's 1,048,000 ) . So this loss of share is both a relative and absolute loss ?
I should get out more...

[french frank]

I should get out more...

Obviously. Meanwhile …

In December 2016, R3 had quite a high reach - 2.12m listeners who clocked up 14.381m hours between them. In December 2017, 1.951m listeners only managed to clock up 11.206m hours. But how those figures convert into a %age share of the entire radio listening (BBC and commercial) - which will amount to well over 1bn hours (that's the average per week) - depends on how much other listening there's been. Both total listening and R3 listening went down in December 2017, but proportionately, R3 took a bigger hit than the total, hence share went down from 1.4% (a very good figure) to 1.1% (a poor-end figure). That discrepancy shows up in the hours per head which went down from 6.8 hours (again, a very good figure) to 5.7 hours (a very poor figure).

The really meaningless figure is the %age share of the population which is always 4% (because the figure is always rounded up or down to the nearest whole number). It means for Radio 3, it can fluctuate from 3.5% to 4.49%: both are reported as 4%. That's a difference of almost one percent of the entire 15+ population of 54m. Technically, it means that R3 could have a QoQ drop of 25% and still retain "4%" reach. Yet there are those who have quoted it as a sign of stability …

Right, I must go and try out my new trekking pole. Or go to the cinema. Or …

[Ein Heldenleben]

Thanks for the excellent explanation . As it's rained torrentially all day I think I have an excuse ...

[french frank]

Thanks for the excellent explanation . As it's rained torrentially all day I think I have an excuse ...

By the way I've just noticed that in March 2017, the %age reach actually did fall to 3% (first time ever?). Exactly, it fell to 3.487%. Just another 0.013%, about 700(?) listeners per week, and it would have hit 4% as usual.

[french frank]

Headline this quarter might be: 'New broom runs out of steam'.

The good news is - that Breakfast had a pretty good weekly average audience (kill-joys might want to express reservations, but far be it from me) at 634k. Listening hours held up fairly well at its usual, not particularly impressive, average, but at least that's better than dropping back. And that's it …

The overall station reach was weak - 1.933m (better than a year ago - but that was horribly weak at 1.884m). The yearly average (i.e. the 4 quarters 2017-18, averaged) was one of the lowest in 20 years.

We, the public, only get a very partial picture and can only theorise on the reality of what's happening. What might be suggested as a possibility is that Radio 3 is falling between two stools - it's not attracting enough new listeners from the so-called 'broader audience' (the 'Classic FM heavy' listener prefers - Classic FM), while the natural Radio 3 listener, or 'Radio 3 heavy' listener is beginning to drift (where? internet radio? streaming services? own CDs?). If anything, this quarter the broader audience seems to have been propping up the station, but that picture may become clearer.

The wider BBC is hostile (apparently) to remedies which would militate against its general 'Maximise the Popular Audience' strategies. Now that digital listening has (marginally) passed analogue, presumably Radio 3 will be allowed to potter along even if the weekly average sinks to 628k - the same as the Asian Network's.

[Anastasius]

.....
...... its general 'Maximise the Popular Audience' strategies. ....

Ah yes. The well known strategy of 'Dumb it Down' and when you hit rock bottom, keep on digging. Whenever I think about the BBC discussing any proposed 'remedies' I conjure up one of those meetings in W1A and Twenty Twelve.

[DracoM]

They will be banking on the Proms even more. And for me, the Proms I find increasingly cringeworthy too, so..........?

Yes, for me it is far more internet / utube / other classical stations than R3, one or two of which are my go-to standards.
Reason? No ads, no bluster and gush, no trails, more adventurous repertoire that has led me to explore a lot of composers etc than before, and the internet assists that exploration.
Late Junction / Jazz Record Requests / Drama / CE / occasional COTW are regulars.

I used to be totally dependent on R3, but.............no more.

[french frank]

I used to be totally dependent on R3, but.............no more.

The completely baffling point about Radio 3 strategy over 20 years is that it's not the jazz, world music, speech programmes &c that put off classical listeners - it's the classical music programmes, the very programmes they would want to be listening to.

[Serial_Apologist]

The completely baffling point about Radio 3 strategy over 20 years is that it's not the jazz, world music, speech programmes &c that put off classical listeners - it's the classical music programmes, the very programmes they would want to be listening to.

Maybe that's all they were listening to - that being an impression one sometimes gets from this forum.

[french frank]

Maybe that's all they were listening to - that being an impression one sometimes gets from this forum.

If you mean they were only listening to the classical music programmes, that was pretty much my custom. I did listen to the drama, but never to jazz, world or Late Junction. But I didn't mind other people listening to these programmes, or them being on Radio 3.

And presumably some listeners only listen to jazz, LJ, world &c, but not the classical programmes.